Wednesday, May 13, 2015


 Updated with Ross Douthat of the New York Times below the following commentary:

Are We Really Losing Our Religion?

Much of the analysis of a new Pew Research Center study fails to distinguish between vibrant, orthodox churches and fading, mainline denominations

Likewise, a New York Times reporter used Pew's new data to resuscitate the long discredited secularization theory to suggest that a more educated and affluent population will naturally reject religion. “The report does not offer an explanation for the decline of the Christian population,” admits Nate Cohn, “but the low levels of Christian affiliation among the young, well educated and affluent are consistent with prevailing theories for the rise of the unaffiliated, like the politicization of religion by American conservatives, a broader disengagement from all traditional institutions and labels, the combination of delayed and inter-religious marriage, and economic development.”

The truth is that the data simply reveal trends that have continued for more than forty years. Mainline Protestant denominations stopped growing in the mid-1960s and never recovered, as Ross Douthat’s Bad Religion points out: “The Lutherans peaked in 1968, the Episcopalians in 1966, and the United Church of Christ in 1965. By the middle of the following decade, they were all in steep decline. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) lost about 1.5 million members between the mid-1960s and the late 1980s. There were 10.6 million United Methodists in 1960…and it was down, down, down thereafter. By the early 1990s, 60 percent of Methodist parishioners were over fifty, and there were more Muslims in America than Episcopalians.”

Catholics shared a somewhat similar fate. Although the total number of Catholics stayed strong because of Latino immigration, Mass attendance for Catholics dropped from 70 percent to 50 percent during the 1960s and 70s, and has continued to decline. The current Pew data reveal a 3% decline in membership for Catholic Churches since 2007—and Catholic voting behavior mirrors that of its secular peers—showing similar levels of support for abortion and same sex marriage as non-Catholics. This should concern all Catholics.

Still, the Pew data doesn't help us understand the tremendous increases in attendance in certain Catholic parishes and dioceses throughout the country. It cannot help us understand the significant increase in priestly ordinations and enrollment in seminaries in those same dioceses. To understand this, it is helpful to once again review The Churching of America, 1776-2005: Winners and Losers in our Religious Economy(Rutgers University Press, 2005) by sociologists Rodney Stark and Roger Finke. Stark and Finke anticipated the “winners and losers” in today’s Pew religious landscape survey, finding that the more a religious organization compromises with society—that is, accommodates to the culture—by blurring its identity and modifying its teaching and ethics, the more it will inevitably decline.

As the mainline Protestant denominations continue to lose members, many Evangelical Protestant congregations continue to stay strong because they ask their followers to fully commit their lives to Jesus Christ. Stark and Finke suggest that religious organizations are stronger to the degree that they impose significant costs in terms of sacrifice upon their members. Those religions which make demands on their followers are flourishing, and if one takes a more micro-analysis of the membership and church attendance data for Catholics by diocese or parish, one gets a very different picture than the macro-analysis presented by the Pew data.

The Catholic parishes and dioceses that are flourishing are those offering a forthright defense of Catholic faith, doctrine, practice, and morality. Just as Stark and Finke predicted, the dioceses and parishes which compromised with the culture declined, while those which maintained a more robust Catholic identity by imposing clear and serious demands on members are thriving.

This stands in clear contrast to the emphasis of an earlier generation of Catholic theologians and historians. Many baby-boomer priests and scholars were shaped by what they believed was an “unfulfilled promise of Vatican II” to embrace modernity. [Editor's note: See CWR's May 11thfeature “1968: The Year of Revolution in American Catholic Education”.] This cultural accommodation helps us better understand the continued Catholic losses—but it also gives hope for the future of the Catholic Church as the aging generation moves on and is replaced by a new generation of Catholics who are attracted to the truth and timelessness of the Church’s teachings, as well as the beauty of Church's traditional art, literature, music, and liturgies. They are drawn to the Church’s commitment to the dignity of the individual and they want to be contributors to that commitment. Despite the depressing depiction of the Pew data by the mainstream media, faithful

Catholics have reason to celebrate—and a reason to help make their Church a welcoming home for followers.

And this from the conservative New York Times, Ross Douthat

The Real But Overstated Decline of American Christianity

The new Pew survey on religious affiliation in America, released and much discussed around the internet yesterday, paints a portrait of institutional Christianity in retreat, and the continuing rise of what we call the “nones” — people attached to no organized religion — as a major constituency in American life. The pace of both trends is striking: As Notre Dame’s David Campbell, quoted in this Daily Caller piece, points out, given how quickly the non-affiliated population rose in the late 1990s and early 2000s you might have expected a slowing or a leveling off, but instead the trendline is still steep, from 16 percent “none” in 2007 to 23 percent today (and about 35 percent “none” among Millennials). Meanwhile identification with every major branch of Christianity is down in percentage terms, and only evangelical Christianity is seeing its absolute numbers still increase; the black Protestant churches are holding steady, but in Pew’s numbers Catholicism seems to have joined the Protestant Mainline in a kind of demographic freefall.

I specialize in a certain pessimism about the state of American Christianity, but when a portrait is this dire-seeming it’s useful to offer some qualifiers. So here are three:

1) What’s in steepest decline is affiliation, not religious practice. What we’re clearly seeing happen, in Bible Belt environs as well as on the liberal coasts, is people who once would have identified as Christians socially (as Christmas-and-Easter Methodists, cultural Catholics, etc.) are now dropping the label altogether. In terms of religious practice, however, the trend is less stark: Using Pew’s own numbers, you’ll see that 39 percent of American reported attending church weekly in 2003; in 2013 it was only down two points, to 37 percent. That undoubtedly overstates true attendance patterns, since people tend to fib and fudge and misremember; real weekly attendance is probably somewhere in the 15-25 percent range. But there aren’t obvious reasons to think that many more people are fibbing or misremembering today than ten years ago; if anything, since cultural Christianity has weakened, the “social desirability bias” driving people to tell pollsters they’re churchgoers should be weakening apace as well. So it’s unlikely that the Pew numbers on reported attendance are masking a major plunge: Instead, what’s happening is that American Christianity is losing more and more of its penumbra while retaining more of its core (albeit an aging core, in many cases) than trends in identification alone suggest.

2) Catholicism might not be in quite as dire shape as it seems. The plunge in Catholic adherence might be the most surprising thing in the Pew data, since for a long time overall Catholic numbers have been kept up by immigration even as white Catholics have drifted away. But some surprises are just polling outliers: For a contrary take, read Mark Gray, who blogs for Georgetown’s Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate, often the best source for Catholic data, and who has been critical of portraits of looming Catholic collapse in the past. Gray notes that when you compare this survey to others like it (the GSS, Gallup, etc.) the Pew numbers for Catholic identification are way down at the bottom of the scatterplot. Maybe this means that Pew really has honed the perfect poll questions and captured exactly the right sample. But it’s just as likely that the average rather than the outlier is closer to the truth, in which case Catholic numbers look more stable, hovering around 23 percent of the US population, close to where they’ve been for a very long time. Pew’s stark graphic showing Catholicism losing six cradle Catholics for every non-Catholic who converts, compared to far better ratios for evangelicalism and even the Mainline, also may overstate the Roman’s church’s problems, since it doesn’t capture all the denominational churn within Protestantism (a Presbyterian becoming a Baptist or vice versa). If you compare Catholicism to specific Protestant churches rather than broader umbrella categories, the Catholic retention rate looks a lot better; at worst in the middle of the pack, and more likely well above average. The fact that so many cradle Catholics are leaping to Protestant denominations is a sign, clearly, of Catholicism’s post-1960s convergence with Protestant norms and habits (visible in mass attendance and many other indicators as well), and that convergence as a general phenomenon is not good news for the faith. But neither is it quite the demographic crisis that a quick look at Pew’s comparisons might suggest.

3) So much depends upon how and when and whether the Millennials grow up. Historically in American life it’s been normal for people to drift away from church or organized religion in their twenties and then circle back once they get married and (especially) have kids. (Catholicism, in particular, gets an awful lot of reverts, another under-studied part of why its overall numbers have held up.) And at least part — not all, there are clearly big ideological and theological issues, but part — of what we’re seeing in the Pew figures is that as the period of drifting has expanded into people’s late 20s and early 30s, with marriage and family getting pushed ever-further back, the drifters themselves become less likely to formally affiliate with their parents’ church, and more likely to see themselves as actually lapsed, ex-Christians, what-have-you, instead of just as people taking a long young-adult break from churchgoing. So the question facing institutional religion, then, is connected to the questions facing the institution of marriage and hovering over the future of the family: Namely, will the Millennial generation eventually enter the unions that they haven’t entered yet, have the babies that they’re delaying having, and end up reconnecting with their parents’ religion (or some other) when they do? Or will a lengthened adultescence plus the impact of the Great Recession ultimately lead to fewer marriages, fewer kids, and less re-entry into religious community over the course of the life cycle? Of course these things could become unbundled; the marriages could happen but not the return to religion. But for now, given how closely they’re still bound for many people, America’s churches can still reasonably hope that in faith as well as family, what’s postponed may not be permanently foregone.

I don’t mean any of these points to recast this report as somehow good news for American Christianity. To make that case you have to go a step further, and talk about how a merely “cultural” Christianity is bad for true Christian faith — a point that I think has merit, but that deserves heavy qualification as well. But that’s an argument for another post; for now, consider this one just an attempt to discern shades of gray and hints of silver in and around institutional Christianity’s darkening sky.


Flavius Hesychius said...

Here's the problem with the 'nones' category: it does not mean a more 'secular' population—it merely means a population wherein the people have answered the question 'To which, if any, religion do you belong?' with 'none'.

It does not, in any way, mean a more atheistic or agnostic population. Indeed, many of the people I know (my age) would say they are not atheists, but not Christians in the usual sense of the word.

In many ways, they simply belong to the quasi-pagan religion to which most people adhere these days.

Then again, I may be assuming too much. Many of them probably don't have a real answer, because they've never thought about the question in the first place.

Victor said...

Finke's and Stark's conclusion would seem valid by principle alone. The more the Church accommodates to the prevailing culture, the less distinct she becomes from that culture, and the less reason there is for anyone to become part of the Church as opposed to just being part of the culture. In other words, the Church stops offering a better alternative to the prevailing culture, so why would anyone bother with the Church.
I think there is here a valid criticism of Vatican II to be made here because it had that nasty undercurrent of thought in desiring to make the Church more modern under the terms of the prevailing culture.
We see that especially in the liturgy. What exactly is so Catholic about the modern Catholic liturgy? Certainly not the music which generally today is the importation of the pagan musical idiom of the prevailing culture. Like so much in the past, the Catholic Church should be the leader in musical art which the rest of the world is to emulate, not the other way around. So too with the loss of Latin to the vulgar tongues of the prevailing culture that is steeped in banality. And instead of teaching the faithful the language of sacred symbolism in the Mass for their divinisation, symbolism was removed to conform to the prevailing culture's lack of understanding of the sacred, and with the obvious result that the liturgy too lost its sacredness and purpose for being.
I could go on and on. I just hope this survey is a wake up call especially to those so-called "progressives" who are largely responsible for the demise in membership of the American Catholic Church.

Julian Barkin said...

Biological solution needed. Nuff Said.

rcg said...

I think the decline is real and permanent. I also think the general, anecdotal, view that the more traditional and faithful parishes are flourishing is true. It's only that they are very few.

Flava Flave is right about the "nones", too. The favourite god these days is tolerant and bound by his own words to forgive. All we have to do is hold him to it.

John said...

Victor nails it: the desire to join the culture completely overwhelmed any resistance by the likes of Card. Ottaviani.

Many in the Church seem to have lost faith in the gospel and advocate leftish, humanistic ideologies as the means of individual salvation.

Even in the face of the rapidly accumulating losses our leadership exhausts itself in more and more incredible justifications, devising false solutions while at the same time ignoring or even persecuting those calling for reforming a badly botched reforms of V-2.